GK's twitter is purposely done to gauge reaction. 5 hours of Twitter, Facebook, and Various gaming sites reactions. So Phil Spencer can take that data just before the show and say, see we are fucked if we don't change this. That's where to $449 comes from.
Still team $399 though ??
That would be pretty clever of them to pull off. Leak something like this just to announce a lower price less than 24 hours later.
@ronvalencia: My 4K tv was released before 2.1 was a thing. I have 2.0A. So no built in free sync and better latency for me...unless I get one of this years OLED TV's. Who knows I may be just crazy enough to do it.
GK's twitter is purposely done to gauge reaction. 5 hours of Twitter, Facebook, and Various gaming sites reactions. So Phil Spencer can take that data just before the show and say, see we are fucked if we don't change this. That's where to $449 comes from.
Still team $399 though ??
That would be pretty clever of them to pull off. Leak something like this just to announce a lower price less than 24 hours later.
This naturally crossed my mind as well but I think that's people just being hopeful rather than any kind of business decision that would actually happen, it's likely to be $449 - $499.
I think it would be funny though if when Phil shows off the price he comes out and says "Scorpio will be launching this fall for $499 US dollars....... Wait no, that's not right, is that right? No? Oh sorry, $399 US dollars!"
@ronvalencia: instead of using charts, you should use facts. Expensive consoles never sell too good even if their tech justifies it. Consoles users don't pay so much attention to resolution specially when games look so similar between systems now. Now that we know Scorpio is going to be $500 you'll see it flop in sales.
My game benchmark charts has nothing to do with Scorpio's price tag i.e. not my argument.
Why? The GPU in that system alone if dedicated would equate to roughly $300 in the PC market, it's superior to a 390X, anyone who would actually be shocked by $499 is obviously clueless.
@Chutebox said:
Not surprising if true. They're most likely not looking to sell a shit load of these from the get go.
Not to mention natural price trends and cost cuts over time.
@ronvalencia: My 4K tv was released before 2.1 was a thing. I have 2.0A. So no built in free sync and better latency for me...unless I get one of this years OLED TV's. Who knows I may be just crazy enough to do it.
I delayed my 4K HDTV upgrade cycle until HDMI 2.1 capable. LG OLED would be my first choice.
When both machines already using FP16 data formats with their graphics operations and their TFLOPS are bottle-necked by memory bandwidth, the machine with the higher effective memory bandwidth and less data transfer bottlenecks is superior.
You are the undisputed king of totally moronic arguments.
Memory storage mean fu**Ing nothing Memory doesn't increase power you blind biased MS suck up.
There are GPU on PC with 4GB of ram that can hit 4k completely destroying your argument,the Pro is ok with 5.5GB it doesn't target 4k most of the time but 1800p and some times even lower which do use less memory,and it doesn't shoot for ultra quality textures either again which use less memory than ultra.
Is the fact that you want to pretend like an ass that any game that has a problem most be because the PS4 hardware has problems,you simply can't stop your self for making bullshit up even when you have been proved wrong.
You did this with Alien Isolation that was badly optimize,you also did it with the Witcher 3 and you got owned when the PS4 version was fix and ended faster than the xbox one..hahahaa
Scorpio doesn't have FP16 double pumped which mean the PS4 Pro has 2 ways to save bandwidth while scorpio only has 1.
Trying to claim the PS4 Pro has a problem with that game is a joke,the developers screw up.
@ronvalencia: My 4K tv was released before 2.1 was a thing. I have 2.0A. So no built in free sync and better latency for me...unless I get one of this years OLED TV's. Who knows I may be just crazy enough to do it.
I delayed my 4K HDTV upgrade cycle until HDMI 2.1 capable. LG OLED would be my first choice.
OLED is the best looking display but you'd have to contend with burn-in.
GK's twitter is purposely done to gauge reaction. 5 hours of Twitter, Facebook, and Various gaming sites reactions. So Phil Spencer can take that data just before the show and say, see we are fucked if we don't change this. That's where to $449 comes from.
Still team $399 though ??
That would be pretty clever of them to pull off. Leak something like this just to announce a lower price less than 24 hours later.
While "clever", this line of thinking is also incredibly naive. They've KNOWN for months what the reaction to a $499 price tag would be. They've also known the price of the box ages ago interally (these things don't get priced on release). If they want to sell it at $449 or $399 (or whatever really), internally they'd have set that goal since day one and even if during R&D, for whatever reason, they couldn't hit that initial price point they'd still have known about that for months now.
I could only see that sort of plan ("leaking" a higher price hours before) happen if, and only if, they want to create the impression of a much more expensive product (in terms of consumer pricing, which also usually implies "it's better" in the general consumer mind) being sold at an affordable price. Though even that could/should have probably been done a few weeks ago.
We'll see. I'm not exactly that confident it won't be $499 but here's hoping for a big surprise!
@gordonfreeman: This is true when it comes to static scrolling bars on say ESPN, but in games you won't notice it at all unless they have a static HUD. I have an LG OLED55B6P model TV. I have not noticed any burn in, banding, or Vignetting as of yet. The refresh cycle helps tremendously with that. It runs roughly every 4 hours of viewing time.
I've been expecting the Scorpio to be priced at $499 so I'd be good with that. However if Microsoft wants to make a lower price announcement then I certainly won't complain about that either.
@Archangel3371: That's how I have been approaching it. Anything higher, and I told myself I'd be out. With all this discussion, it seems impossible for it to be above $499 USD.
Based on the fact that you are getting a GPU that is 4x higher in Tflop performance, a slightly modified CPU with a higher clock rate, more bandwidth, and 4GB more of memory. I would say 499.99 sounds about right. 399.99 would mean Microsoft has to take a fairly sizable loss on each unit sold. It's the components and R&D that determine the cost of an item.
My reason has nothing to do with what the hardware cost.
Anyone who thinks otherwise is obviously clueless.
These companies can't just give people a price they want simply because that's what they want, this stuff costs money, a lot of it, and if it's priced at something that's because it's rationalized by how much it cost to build it.
These are businesses, not charities, for what they're offering $499 is still a bargain when you look around at what your other options are. For a PC you're looking at at least $800 to be competent with this console, the Pro is cheaper but it's inferior on every level and is missing a few things this system has and can do.
You have to be reasonable and approach what they're offering for what it is, not what you would like it to be.
Btw, this "leak" is apparently from the rehearsal. So there is still a chance it's not legit!
They can easily be playing us, as I doubt they'd reveal the full price on the rehearsal (in fact, if I remember correctly during the 2013 rehearsals neither Sony nor MS talked about pricing).
I always thought it was going to be the double of Xbox One S, so with the price drop of $50 for some consoles, $500 would be the suspected number. Still an acceptable price
Btw, this "leak" is apparently from the rehearsal. So there is still a chance it's not legit!
They can easily be playing us, as I doubt they'd reveal the full price on the rehearsal (in fact, if I remember correctly during the 2013 rehearsals neither Sony nor MS talked about pricing).
So, in short: $399 == Not Impossible Yet!
I don't know if the price is going to change but I completely agree with your logic, when do prices for console ever just nonchalantly make their way out into the wild before the system is even revealed?
I can't think of a single time, frankly I would think it would be one of the most secretive things about the system that only a few at the very top would be privy to.
This price floating around does seem conveniently orchestrated.
@ronvalencia: Are you still going to call the pro "half assed" if Scorpio gets a $500 price tag? To me it seems Sony was going for a target price not specs, so there is nothing "half assed" about it.
The fun part is that scorpio is also half assed as well it use the same jaguar 200mhz faster which by no means is even close to an i5 let alone an i7 or ryzen and ronvalencia simply ignore it.
@ronvalencia said:
1 and 2. It's you who needs education. Again, so you've avoided my question with excuses.
You still underestimating memory storage and bandwidth increase.
Scorpio's 9 GB vs PS4 Pro's 5.5 GB = ~1.63X or ~63 percent higher
Scorpio's 326 GB/s phy BW vs PS4 Pro's 218 GB/s phy BW = ~1.50X or ~50 percent higher
Scorpio's 6 TFLOPS FP32 vs PS4 Pro's 4.2 TFLOPS FP32 = 1.43X or 43 percent higher
No it is you who need a lesson is honesty lemming.
1-The Pro is not shooting to ultra textures so it doesn't need 8GB of ram,did you calculated that into your biased ass equation? NO you did not.
Only on 1 of this 3 cases Ram usage would be to high for PS4 Pro at 4k,but even then simply dropping AA bring the game within PS4 Pro reach.
So your arguments are mess up hell look at the witcher 3 using ultra textures just 3.2GB use the Pro would have plenty memory to spare still.
2-Did you calculated into your equation that 2 FP16 operation require the same bandwidth as 1 32bit one but will double performance?
Did you calculated into your equation that if a developer move process to FP16,using 1.2TF would yield 2.4TF of performance on top of the 3TF still used by normal process,and doing so would require no more bandwidth than the one available already.?
NO you did not.
3-Did you calculated into your equation that at FP16 4.2TF = 8.4 TF? And that 8.4TF > 6TF?
Don't tell me that you will go back on your own words hypocrite,you claim Scorpio using FP16 would exceed a 1080GTX you claim Scorpio would be 12TF using FP16 and no where did you raise a flag about bandwidth when you well know that 12TF will take much more than 320GB/s hell the R390X has 384GB/s and is 5.9TF.
You are a hypocrite who raise pitfall for products that you don't like and ignore pitfalls for the ones you like.
Even if Scorpio had FP16,still would not exceed a 1080GTX,The Pascal Titan is 11TF and has 480Gb/s way more than Scorpio and that is without taking into account that Nvidia GPU >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> AMD GPU when the topic is bandwidth usage,with much less bandwidth an Nvdia GPU would still be one from AMD,it has been like that for years.
My advice quit your lame ass arguments,you look completely moronic trying to ignore FP16,trying to downplay it ignoring the efficiency it bring to Pro simply because Scorpio lack it,you are on record hyping FP16 and it wasn't until it was confirm that Scorpio didn't have it that you stopped hyping it.
@tormentos: I'm not a mod, but try to keep it to E3 stuff, and leave the spec/tech talk out of it. This is not going to be discussed at E3, and aren't there enough topics do discuss this?
I'm only saying this because I find it annoying, and it fucks up an E3 topic.
@tormentos: I'm not a mod, but try to keep it to E3 stuff, and leave the spec/tech talk out of it. This is not going to be discussed at E3, and aren't there enough topics do discuss this?
I'm only saying this because I find it annoying, and it fucks up an E3 topic.
I always thought it was going to be the double of Xbox One S, so with the price drop of $50 for some consoles, $500 would be the suspected number. Still an acceptable price
This is true $500 is a hell of acceptable for Scorpio,no one should deny that,even more compare to what the PS4 and even more XBO offer in 2013,at least scorpio can hit 4k in more instances.
So while i think it will be in a great disadvantage vs the Slim PS4 and XBO for what you are getting the Price is more than acceptable.
I always thought it was going to be the double of Xbox One S, so with the price drop of $50 for some consoles, $500 would be the suspected number. Still an acceptable price
This is true $500 is a hell of acceptable for Scorpio,no one should deny that,even more compare to what the PS4 and even more XBO offer in 2013,at least scorpio can hit 4k in more instances.
So while i think it will be in a great disadvantage vs the Slim PS4 and XBO for what you are getting the Price is more than acceptable.
This is the most honest post I have ever seen from you, thank you.
Its probably gonna be $500, which means i'm gonna pass. I would rather get a GTX 1080 or a GTX 1080 Ti which are both stronger than Scorpio by a fair margin
Yeah sound like total damage control after a MS call..ahahahaa
Still 500 million hours in 1 year + 7 months is abysmal and the only reason MS stated it that way is because blind fanboys will only look at the 500 million hours and not question anything else.
Yeah sound like total damage control after a MS call..ahahahaa
Still 500 million hours in 1 year + 7 months is abysmal and the only reason MS stated it that way is because blind fanboys will only look at the 500 million hours and not question anything else.
I wouldn't agree with that, assuming the Xbox One was at like 19 million when this feature came out and likely at 30 million now, that's like 20 hours per person if absolutely everyone on the platform was using it.
Log in to comment